DDXP characters - unexpected tactics?

[Henry]

I'm not totally convinced by this reasoning. I worked for a large corporation--one that is larger that Wizards of the Coast, I'm sure--and they weren't paralyzed by bureaucracy when it came to errata. Perhaps WotC is, but I don't think that would excuse them in this instance.

I used to work for a company smaller than WotC that went with a known error to its employee handbooks for a YEAR without correction.

I can believe it happening, especially where you're talking about possibly printing and assembling the packets in one location, and then shipping them to another. How many demos were run at the DDXP, again?

 

[helium3]

Yeah, because yet another argument about this is so worthwhile when we could be talking about something original.. :\

Feh. That's true. No amount of "expressions of concern" is really going to change things. I just don't appreciate some smug board troll chiming in with a condescending and content free post. I get just as annoyed by "me to!!" or "I'm Yoinking This!!" posts.

- Because you can flank with ranged weapons, the ranger, with Nimble Strike could give flanking to other characters, use Nimble strike to shift, attack, then use her Move to shift back. If the enemy attacked, she could Fox’s Cunning away and retaliate, then Fey Step away on her turn.

Why is the above combo useful? Seems to me (having not actually played yet) that Nimble Strike is better for popping out from behind cover to take a shot and then popping back behind cover. I haven't seen any rules on flanking. Are they listed on that big multi-page document I haven't looked at yet?

Bloodhunt and Infernal Wrath work great together, and it was often worth it to wait on using an encounter ability until after he hit with an at-will just to gain the bonus to hit for the big encounter or daily attack. This means not starting out with one's more powerful attacks and building up to them.

Heh heh. Does someone get to yell "Finish Him" right before you use Infernal Wrath. It does seem like a good combo if your target's bloodied and has just hit you with an attack. This would be even nastier if you were a Tiefling Warlock and had just marked your enemey with a curse.

 

[cdrcjsn]

Why is the above combo useful? Seems to me (having not actually played yet) that Nimble Strike is better for popping out from behind cover to take a shot and then popping back behind cover. I haven't seen any rules on flanking. Are they listed on that big multi-page document I haven't looked at yet?

Provide the rogue a flank? Offer another PC as a hit point soak for enemy melee?

Provided of course that he is correct that ranged weapons can now flank (I haven't looked that up yet).

 

[ThirdWizard]

Why is the above combo useful? Seems to me (having not actually played yet) that Nimble Strike is better for popping out from behind cover to take a shot and then popping back behind cover. I haven't seen any rules on flanking. Are they listed on that big multi-page document I haven't looked at yet?

Nimble strike is great for that! But, that's fairly obvious, and this one wasn't. I think one of the things that we realized was how precious any bonus to hit is. Each hit is worth more in 4e than it is in 3e, and a miss is quite a wasted opportunity.

For example, take the Fighter's Cleave power. When facing off mooks, this is great as you can kill multiple minion type enemies very quickly while you face off against the more powerful monster with them. In a situation like this, there's a large difference between hitting and missing - more than I saw coming.

Flanking is a +2 to hit. That is very nice, and you take it everywhere you can get it. I think its even worth it for the ranger to provide, at least at first level. It's not like the ranger is that weak defense-wise. It's not a tactic I would use often, perhaps, but there were a limited number of characters joining melee with these pregens.

Heh heh. Does someone get to yell "Finish Him" right before you use Infernal Wrath. It does seem like a good combo if your target's bloodied and has just hit you with an attack. This would be even nastier if you were a Tiefling Warlock and had just marked your enemey with a curse.

I did notice a fair bit of cackling glee coming from the wizard player.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Link to ranged weapons flanking.

 

[fortunato]

whats wrong with you guys??

stop whining about this topic....THEY FIXED THE PROBLEM WHO CARES IF IT WAS SOONER THAN LATER!!! yeeesh

 

[keterys]

The incorrect mechanics involved the Paladin using the marking ability, something also available to (as far as we know at this point) the Fighter, Rogue, Range and Warlock.

Only the fighter and paladin mark. The other characters do completely different things (marked is a defined term, meaning -2 to hit other people, etc)

 

[fafhrd]

- Bloodhunt and Infernal Wrath work great together, and it was often worth it to wait on using an encounter ability until after he hit with an at-will just to gain the bonus to hit for the big encounter or daily attack. This means not starting out with one's more powerful attacks and building up to them.

Mmmmmm. Take the action surge feat for the follow up attack. That's it. First character is going to be a tiefling.

 

[helium3]

Provide the rogue a flank? Offer another PC as a hit point soak for enemy melee?

Provided of course that he is correct that ranged weapons can now flank (I haven't looked that up yet).

No no. You misunderstand. Why does the ranger need to move in to attack? As near as I can tell, he can flank from 30 feet away now.

I think maybe i just wasn't understanding what ThirdWizard was saying.

 

[outsider]

I'm a hobbiest programmer, and I've got a little insight to why this kind of thing slips past a designer(whether they are designing software, or a p&p rpg).

When somebody who has worked on a project tests it, they tend to use it the "right" or "intended" way. They don't do this intentionally, it's just the way it is. You know what you intend your system to do, thus when you test, you use the system in the intended way. It's actually a bit hard to deliberately do things the wrong way with your own system. Often, no matter how hard you try, something big slips through that is blatantly obvious to anybody that wasn't involved in making the system. This is one of the reasons external testing is valuable.